The Digital Picture Photo Forum Deleting “Anti Canon” Posts

Karel Donk � Blog Archive � The-Digital-Picture.com deletes “anti-Canon” post about the EOS 5D Mark II

Karel Donk, who recently wrote up a post detailing some of the quality control problems with the new Canon 5D Mark II, found that when he posted on his post at a new photo forum called the-digital-picture.com that his post was deleted by Bryan Carnathan, the guy who apparently runs the forum, saying that he’d rather not have “anti-Canon” posts in his forums.

As I really hate censorship, it looks like this won’t be a forum that I’ll be checking out.

Apparently Donk’s been banned from the forums at DPReview as well after questioning Canon there in the past.

I’ve been following my own Canon 5D Mark II tracking information with UPS and it looks like it arrived in Oakland last night and is scheduled for delivery on Monday. Maybe I’ll get lucky and it will show up tomorrow for the weekend. Thank much to the good folks at Adorama for getting me one!

Loading Facebook Comments ...
9 comments on “The Digital Picture Photo Forum Deleting “Anti Canon” Posts
  1. Ulrich says:

    Does not surprise me. It seems he does not make qualified statements.

    And it seems you do censor your blog too, don’t you?

  2. Thomas Hawk says:

    Ulrich, I don’t censor my blog actually.

  3. AdamJ says:

    I think that what people have a hard time swallowing is that this is a single person’s opinion, who has ‘cherry-picked’ certain statements from other reviews to create a gospel-like blog post that indicates how bad a particular product is – when in the end the person doesn’t even own the product they are ‘complaining’ about.

    Potential users should read those reviews in their entirety, as the original authors intended, before attempting to make conclusions about how the reviewer felt.

    I can attest to using the Nikon D700, and now the 5D Mark II first hand, and I’ve even posted some of my opinions here – http://forums.canonphotogroup.com/showthread.php?t=2508

    But people don’t seem to care about rational reviews, and instead are drawn to doomsday sensationalism….

  4. Spokker says:

    “I think that what people have a hard time swallowing is that this is a single person’s opinion, who has ‘cherry-picked’ certain statements from other reviews to create a gospel-like blog post that indicates how bad a particular product is – when in the end the person doesn’t even own the product they are ‘complaining’ about.”

    I’ve never been to Korea, yet I was able to cobble together some crap about the Asian financial crisis and turn it into a report to give to an economics professor years ago.

    If you care that he doesn’t own the camera, then fine. There are some reasons that he writes reviews of products he doesn’t own. He can’t afford all the cameras that are released. He likes to follow camera news or whatever and wants to comment. He might be a nut.

    I don’t see how that gets the post deleted.

  5. Rob-L says:

    On the surface this looks like censorship. On the other hand it could be a very common creature that inhabits various forums; the troll.

    A troll will go into the Canon forum and post a “Canon Sucks” type of comment and it has no real point. A clever troll will make it look legit, but when you read between the lines it’s usually a fan boy of some other manufacturer trying to start a fight or look for negative attention. I’ve seen this several times over at the forums at dpreview.com.

    If it’s legit, then the post should stay, but if it’s garbage, take it off. That’s not censorship, that’s quality control.

  6. AdamJ says:

    I think the post was deleted because instead of actually talking about the camera, he instead posted a LINK to his pseudo-review of the 5D Mark II in absentia on his blog, asking for comments.

    The forum community should be able to contain discussions that originate internally and going and posting a link to your blog post is typically not appreciated. Some view it as free publicity or traffic, etc. Regardless of the quality of his information and views, it may have been as simple for him to just post “his review” directly into the forum community, instead of linking to his blog.

    As Rob-L said, his post comes across as a potential troll, and I would also say posting a link to his blog asking for comments is another form of trolling, that alone would be enough to pull his post.

    Nobody ‘censored’ his blog, he just SPAM’d it to a forum and now everyone is up in arms claiming he has been censored on that forum. Get a grip.

  7. Spokker says:

    “On the surface this looks like censorship. On the other hand it could be a very common creature that inhabits various forums; the troll.”

    Definition of a troll: someone you disagree with.

  8. Spokker says:

    “Nobody ‘censored’ his blog, he just SPAM’d it to a forum and now everyone is up in arms claiming he has been censored on that forum. Get a grip.”

    The owner of the forum did not say anything about spamming. What he did say was “I welcome you to the community, but would rather you not bring your anti-canon posts here.”

    If he was concerned about spam he would have said it. Sounds to me like the guy has nothing to say about linking to your review on your personal blog.

  9. [url=http://www.ksiegowosc-kurs.info/]kurs ksiegowosci[/url]